Process and Reality — the Gifford Lectures, 1929

Open to allAlfred North Whitehead453 segments · 151 pp

The text is shown on its own: no facing layer is held for this issue.

page 33

In the ‘organic’ theory, (i) there is only one type of temporal actual entity; (ii) each such actual entity is extensive; (ili) from the standpoint of any one actual entity, the ‘given’ actual world is a nexus of actual entities, transforming the potentiality of the extensive scheme into a plenum of actual occasions; (iv) in this plenum, motion cannot be significantly attributed to any actual occasion; (v) the plenum is continuous in respect to the potentiality from which it arises, but each actual entity is atomic; (vi) the term ‘actual occasion’ is used synonomously with ‘actual entity’; but chiefly when its character of extensiveness has some direct relevance to the discussion, either extensiveness in the form of temporal extensiveness, that is to say ‘duration,’ or extensiveness in the form of spatial extension, or in the more complete signification of spatio-temporal extensiveness.

SECTION V

The baseless metaphysical doctrine of ‘undifferentiated endurance’ is a subordinate derivative from the misapprehension of the proper character of the extensive scheme.

In our perception of the contemporary world via presentational immediacy, nexus of actual entities are objectified for the percipient under the perspective of their characters of extensive continuity. In the perception of a contemporary stone, for example, the separate indi-

p. 120

viduality of each actual entity in the nexus constituting the stone is merged into the unity of the extensive plenum, which for Descartes and for common sense, 1s the stone. The complete objectification is effected by the generic extensive perspective of the stone, specialized into the specific perspective of some sense-datum, such as some definite colour, for example. Thus the immediate percept assumes the character of the quiet undifferentiated endurance of the material stone, perceived by means of its quality of colour. This basic notion dominates language, and haunts both science and philosophy. Further, by an unfortunate application of the excellent maxim, that our conjectural explanation should always proceed by the utilization of a vera causa, whenever science or philosophy has ventured to extrapolate beyond the limits of the immediate deliverance of direct perception, a satisfactory explanation has always complied with the condition that substances with undifferentiated endurance of essential attributes be produced, and that activity be explained as the occasional modification of their accidental qualities and relations. Thus the imaginations of men are dominated by the quiet extensive stone with its relationships of positions, and its quality of colour—relationships and qualities which occasionally change. The stone, thus interpreted, guarantees the vera causa, and conjectural explanations in science and philosophy follow its model.

Thus in framing cosmological theory, the notion of continuous stuff with permanent attributes, enduring without differentiation, and retaining its self-identity through any stretch of time however small or large, has been fundamental. The stuff undergoes change in respect to accidental qualities and relations; but it is numerically self-identical in its character of one actual entity throughout its accidental adventures. The admission of this fundamental metaphysical concept has wrecked the various systems of pluralistic realism.

This metaphysical concept has formed the basis of scientific materialism. For example, when the activitiesp. 121 associated with so-called empty space required scientific formulation, the scientists of the nineteenth century produced the materialistic ether as the ultimate substratum whose accidental adventures constituted these activities.

But the interpretation of the stone, on which the whole concept is based, has proved to be entirely mistaken. In the first place, from the seventeenth century onwards the notion of the simple inherence of the colour in the stone has had to be given up. This introduces the further difficulty that it is the colour which is extended and only inferentially the stone, since now we have had to separate the colour from the stone. Secondly, the molecular theory has robbed the stone of its continuity, of its unity, and of its passiveness. The stone is now conceived as a society of separate molecules in violent agitation. But the metaphysical concepts, which had their origin in a mistake about the stone, were now applied to the individual molecules. Each atom was still a stuff which retained its self-identity and its essential attributes in any portion of time—however short, and however long—provided that it did not perish. The notion of the undifferentiated endurance of substances with essential attributes and with accidental adventure was still applied. This is the root doctrine of materialism: the substance, thus conceived, is the ultimate actual entity.

But this materialistic concept has proved to be as mistaken for the atom as it was.for the stone. The atom is only explicable as a society with activities involving rhythms with their definite periods. Again the concept shifted its application: protons and electrons were conceived as materialistic electric charges whose activities could be construed as locomotive adventures. We are now approaching the limits of any reasonable certainty in our scientific knowledge; but again there is evidence that the concept may be mistaken. The mysterious quanta of energy have made their appearance, derived, as it would seem, from the recesses of protons, or of electrons. Still worse for the concept, these quanta seem to dissolvep. 122 into the vibrations of light. Also the material of the stars seems to be wasting itself in the production of the vibrations.

Further, the quanta of energy are associated by a simple law with the periodic rhythms which we detect in the molecules. Thus the quanta are, themselves, in their own nature, somehow vibratory; but they emanate from the protons and electrons. Thus there is every reason to believe that rhythmic periods cannot be dissociated from the protonic and electronic entities.

Commentary
page 33 ·

No commentary for this page under the selected tracks.

There is commentary on page 1.